Dataset Information

Effect of Monthly High-Dose Vitamin D Supplementation on Cardiovascular Disease in the Vitamin D Assessment Study : A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Cohort studies have reported increased incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among individuals with low vitamin D status. To date, randomized clinical trials of vitamin D supplementation have not found an effect, possibly because of using too low a dose of vitamin D.

Objective

To examine whether monthly high-dose vitamin D supplementation prevents CVD in the general population.

Design, setting, and participants

The Vitamin D Assessment Study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that recruited participants mostly from family practices in Auckland, New Zealand, from April 5, 2011, through November 6, 2012, with follow-up until July 2015. Participants were community-resident adults aged 50 to 84 years. Of 47 905 adults invited from family practices and 163 from community groups, 5110 participants were randomized to receive vitamin D3 (n = 2558) or placebo (n = 2552). Two participants retracted consent, and all others (n = 5108) were included in the primary analysis.

Interventions

Oral vitamin D3 in an initial dose of 200 000 IU, followed a month later by monthly doses of 100 000 IU, or placebo for a median of 3.3 years (range, 2.5-4.2 years).

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was the number of participants with incident CVD and death, including a prespecified subgroup analysis in participants with vitamin D deficiency (baseline deseasonalized 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels <20 ng/mL). Secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, hypertension, arrhythmias, arteriosclerosis, stroke, and venous thrombosis.

Results

Of the 5108 participants included in the analysis, the mean (SD) age was 65.9 (8.3) years, 2969 (58.1%) were male, and 4253 (83.3%) were of European or other ethnicity, with the remainder being Polynesian or South Asian. Mean (SD) baseline deseasonalized 25(OH)D concentration was 26.5 (9.0) ng/mL, with 1270 participants (24.9%) being vitamin D deficient. In a random sample of 438 participants, the mean follow-up 25(OH)D level was greater than 20 ng/mL higher in the vitamin D group than in the placebo group. The primary outcome of CVD occurred in 303 participants (11.8%) in the vitamin D group and 293 participants (11.5%) in the placebo group, yielding an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.87-1.20). Similar results were seen for participants with baseline vitamin D deficiency and for secondary outcomes.

Conclusions and relevance

Monthly high-dose vitamin D supplementation does not prevent CVD. This result does not support the use of monthly vitamin D supplementation for this purpose. The effects of daily or weekly dosing require further study.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: ACTRN12611000402943.

SUBMITTER: Scragg R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5815022 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePrevious randomized clinical trials have reported inconsistent results on the effect of vitamin D supplementation on cancer incidence.ObjectiveTo examine whether high-dose vitamin D supplementation received monthly, without calcium, is associated with a reduction in cancer incidence and cancer mortality in the general population.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a post hoc analysis of data from the Vitamin D Assessment (ViDA) study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that recruited participants from family practices and community groups in Auckland, New Zealand, from April 5, 2011, through November 6, 2012, with follow-up completed December 31, 2015. Participants were adult community residents aged 50 to 84 years. Of 47 905 adults invited from family practices and 163 from community groups, 5110 participants were randomized to receive vitamin D3 (n = 2558) or placebo (n = 2552). Two participants withdrew consent, and all others (n = 5108) were included in the primary analysis. Data analysis was by intention to treat.InterventionsOral vitamin D3, in an initial bolus dose of 200 000 IU and followed by monthly doses of 100 000 IU, or placebo for a median of 3.3 years (range, 2.5-4.2 years).Main outcomes and measuresPost hoc primary outcome was the number of all primary invasive and in situ malignant neoplasms (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers) diagnosed from randomization until the study medication was discontinued on July 31, 2015.ResultsOf the 5108 participants included in the analysis, the mean (SD) age was 65.9 (8.3) years, 58.1% were male, and 4253 (83.3%) were of European or another race/ethnicity, with the remainder being Polynesian or South Asian. Mean (SD) baseline deseasonalized 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration was 26.5 (9.0) ng/mL. In a random sample of 438 participants, the mean follow-up 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration consistently was greater than 20 ng/mL higher in the vitamin D group than in the placebo group. The primary outcome of cancer comprised 328 total cases of cancer (259 invasive and 69 in situ malignant neoplasms) and occurred in 165 of 2558 participants (6.5%) in the vitamin D group and 163 of 2550 (6.4%) in the placebo group, yielding an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.01 (95% CI, 0.81-1.25; P = .95).Conclusions and relevanceHigh-dose vitamin D supplementation prescribed monthly for up to 4 years without calcium may not prevent cancer. This study suggests that daily or weekly dosing for a longer period may require further study.Trial registrationanzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12611000402943.

Project description:ImportanceVitamin D may be important for neurodevelopment. The optimal daily dose of vitamin D for early brain development is not known.ObjectivesTo test whether a higher (1200 IU) vs standard (400 IU) dose of vitamin D3 has beneficial effects on neurodevelopment in the first 2 years of life and whether serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration is associated with neurodevelopment.Design, setting, and participantsThis double-blind, interventional randomized clinical trial involved healthy infants born full-term between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2014, at a maternity hospital in Helsinki, Finland, at the 60th northern latitude. Two-year follow-up was conducted by May 30, 2016. Data analysis was by the intention-to-treat principle. Data were analyzed from November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021.InterventionsRandomization of 404 infants to receive 400 IU of oral vitamin D3 supplementation daily and 397 infants to receive 1200 IU of oral vitamin D3 supplementation daily from 2 weeks to 24 months of age.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were child total developmental milestone scores at 12 and 24 months of age measured using the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (total score is calculated as a mean of the 5 subscale scores: total score range, 0-60, where 0 indicates delay in all developmental domains and 60 indicates that the child can master all age-specific skills) as well as externalizing, internalizing, and dysregulation problems and competencies scores at 24 months measured using the Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (range 0-2, where 0 indicates no problems or no competencies and 2 indicates a high level of problems or a high level of competencies; variables were standardized to the mean [SD] of 0 [1]). Secondary outcomes were specific skills, problems, and competencies derived from these questionnaires.ResultsOf the 987 families recruited, 495 children were randomly assigned to receive 400 IU of vitamin D3, and 492 children were randomly assigned to receive 1200 IU of vitamin D3. A total of 801 families participated in the follow-up at 12 and/or 24 months, with 404 children (207 girls [51.2%]) in the 400-IU group and 397 children (198 girls [49.9%]) in the 1200-IU group. All children were of Northern European ethnicity. No differences were found between the 400-IU group and the 1200-IU group in the mean (SD) adjusted Ages and Stages Questionnaire total score at 12 months (45.0 [7.1] vs 46.2 [7.9]; mean difference [MD], 1.17 [95% CI, -0.06 to 2.38]) or 24 months (50.9 [5.3] vs 51.5 [5.5]; MD, 0.48 [95% CI, -0.40 to 1.36]). No differences were found between the 400-IU group and the 1200-IU group at 24 months in the mean (SD) adjusted Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment externalizing domain score (-0.07 [1.00] vs 0.07 [0.98]; MD, 0.15 [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.31]), internalizing domain score (0.04 [1.06] vs -0.02 [0.98]; MD, -0.07 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.1.0]), dysregulation domain score (-0.00 [1.04] vs 0.02 [0.96]; MD, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.14 to 0.18]), or competencies score (-0.02 [1.02] vs 0.01 [1.02]; MD, 0.03 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.20]). The 1200-IU group did have a higher risk in the adjusted model of scoring 1.5 SDs or more on the externalizing domain score (odds ratio, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.19-4.56]; P = .01). Levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D were not associated with the primary outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceHigher-than-standard vitamin D3 doses provide no systematic benefits for child neurodevelopment up to 2 years of age. However, the potential disadvantageous effects of higher doses could not be fully excluded; even if minimal, the potential nonbeneficial effects of higher-than-standard doses warrant further studies in which both safety and benefits should be evaluated.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01723852.

Project description:Importance:Few studies have assessed the effects of daily vitamin D doses at or above the tolerable upper intake level for 12 months or greater, yet 3% of US adults report vitamin D intakes of at least 4000 IU per day. Objective:To assess the dose-dependent effect of vitamin D supplementation on volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) and strength. Design, Setting, and Participants:Three-year, double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted in a single center in Calgary, Canada, from August 2013 to December 2017, including 311 community-dwelling healthy adults without osteoporosis, aged 55 to 70 years, with baseline levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) of 30 to 125 nmol/L. Interventions:Daily doses of vitamin D3 for 3 years at 400 IU (n?=?109), 4000 IU (n?=?100), or 10?000 IU (n?=?102). Calcium supplementation was provided to participants with dietary intake of less than 1200 mg per day. Main Outcomes and Measures:Co-primary outcomes were total volumetric BMD at radius and tibia, assessed with high resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and bone strength (failure load) at radius and tibia estimated by finite element analysis. Results:Of 311 participants who were randomized (53% men; mean [SD] age, 62.2 [4.2] years), 287 (92%) completed the study. Baseline, 3-month, and 3-year levels of 25(OH)D were 76.3, 76.7, and 77.4 nmol/L for the 400-IU group; 81.3, 115.3, and 132.2 for the 4000-IU group; and 78.4, 188.0, and 144.4 for the 10?000-IU group. There were significant group?×?time interactions for volumetric BMD. At trial end, radial volumetric BMD was lower for the 4000 IU group (-3.9 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, -6.5 to -1.3]) and 10?000 IU group (-7.5 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, -10.1 to -5.0]) compared with the 400 IU group with mean percent change in volumetric BMD of -1.2% (400 IU group), -2.4% (4000 IU group), and -3.5% (10?000 IU group). Tibial volumetric BMD differences from the 400 IU group were -1.8 mg HA/cm3 (95% CI, -3.7 to 0.1) in the 4000 IU group and -4.1 mg HA/cm3 in the 10?000 IU group (95% CI, -6.0 to -2.2), with mean percent change values of -0.4% (400 IU), -1.0% (4000 IU), and -1.7% (10?000 IU). There were no significant differences for changes in failure load (radius, P?=?.06; tibia, P?=?.12). Conclusions and Relevance:Among healthy adults, treatment with vitamin D for 3 years at a dose of 4000 IU per day or 10?000 IU per day, compared with 400 IU per day, resulted in statistically significant lower radial BMD; tibial BMD was significantly lower only with the 10?000 IU per day dose. There were no significant differences in bone strength at either the radius or tibia. These findings do not support a benefit of high-dose vitamin D supplementation for bone health; further research would be needed to determine whether it is harmful. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01900860.

Project description:Blood levels of homocysteine may be increased in Alzheimer disease (AD) and hyperhomocysteinemia may contribute to disease pathophysiology by vascular and direct neurotoxic mechanisms. Even in the absence of vitamin deficiency, homocysteine levels can be reduced by administration of high-dose supplements of folic acid and vitamins B(6) and B(12). Prior studies of B vitamins to reduce homocysteine in AD have not had sufficient size or duration to assess their effect on cognitive decline.To determine the efficacy and safety of B vitamin supplementation in the treatment of AD.A multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial of high-dose folate, vitamin B(6), and vitamin B(12) supplementation in 409 (of 601 screened) individuals with mild to moderate AD (Mini-Mental State Examination scores between 14 and 26, inclusive) and normal folic acid, vitamin B(12), and homocysteine levels. The study was conducted between February 20, 2003, and December 15, 2006, at clinical research sites of the Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study located throughout the United States.Participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups of unequal size to increase enrollment (60% treated with high-dose supplements [5 mg/d of folate, 25 mg/d of vitamin B(6), 1 mg/d of vitamin B(12)] and 40% treated with identical placebo); duration of treatment was 18 months.Change in the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog).A total of 340 participants (202 in active treatment group and 138 in placebo group) completed the trial while taking study medication. Although the vitamin supplement regimen was effective in reducing homocysteine levels (mean [SD], -2.42 [3.35] in active treatment group vs -0.86 [2.59] in placebo group; P < .001), it had no beneficial effect on the primary cognitive measure, rate of change in ADAS-cog score during 18 months (0.372 points per month for placebo group vs 0.401 points per month for active treatment group, P = .52; 95% confidence interval of rate difference, -0.06 to 0.12; based on the intention-to-treat generalized estimating equations model), or on any secondary measures. A higher quantity of adverse events involving depression was observed in the group treated with vitamin supplements.This regimen of high-dose B vitamin supplements does not slow cognitive decline in individuals with mild to moderate AD.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00056225.